Skip to main content

About your Search

20130201
20130228
LANGUAGE
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4
CSPAN
Feb 17, 2013 10:00am EST
represent his communities and his counties and this state in the u.s. congress. i think they should be and is a part of our responsibility. being allowed -- to allow representative to pursue a request from the city or county or the state or political substitution, a government unit, i think we should be allowed to advocate for our home towns. however, the conference has seen fit to impose a ban on so-called earmarkes. i have to abide by that position the caucus has taken. >> de think there are a lot of members who would like to have them returned? do they tell you that privately? >> is, does a better every day. a member or two or three -- yes, just about every day. a member or two or three will come to me. if we limited them to read -- 2 official request from a local city or mayor or city council or state government or government unit officially, i think if we allow that type of advocation by members of congress, we would not have that things happen. we had some bad things happen. the so-called bridge to nowhere. by the way, which was not an appropriation. it was the authorization committe
CSPAN
Feb 17, 2013 6:00pm EST
represent his communities and his counties and his state in the u.s. congress. i think that should be and is a part of our responsibility. so i would be in favor of being allowed -- to allow representative to present a request from the city or county or state or political squigs government unit. i think we should be allowed to advocate it on our hometowns. however, our conference has seen fit to impose a ban on so-called earmarks, and i have to abide by that position the caucus has taken. >> do you think that there are a lot of members who would really like to have them returned but -- do they tell that you privately? >> oh, yeah, just about every day, a member or two or three will bring the subject up. and i think we would do away with most, if not all of the bad earmarks if we limited them to a official request from a local city or mayor or city council or state government or governmental unit officially and we allowed abdication by members of congress, we would not have bad things happen. we had some bad things happen, so-called bridge to nowhere, which, by the way, was not an a
CSPAN
Feb 24, 2013 6:00pm EST
-- u.s. attorneys who have shown shown great evidence of willingness to prosecute these types of crimes, and others who have not. the united states district court for the northern district of all -- illinois, where chicago is located, where they have one of the highest if not the highest murder rates in the country, also has one of the lowest rates of prosecution of gun crimes. it is very disconcerting that you have this kind of inconsistency. i do not think it is all a factor of money, although we are always paying attention to whether law enforcement has the resources they need. they could be more effective and save more lives if this administration were dedicated to making enforcement of our existing gun laws and keeping guns out of the hands of criminals and those with serious mental illness.-- illnesses than they have shown thus far. >> one of the biggest aspects of any gun bill that would be proposed is the so-called gun show loophole, the fact that right now folks who buy guns at gun shows do not require the same criminal background check -- check as they did elsewhere. >>
CSPAN
Feb 24, 2013 11:00am EST
. it is on automatic pilot and it will suck up all of the discretionary budget in the u.s.. if anyone cannot understand why we are trying to do with social security to make it solvent, they are just lost in the swamps. they are trustees of the system. wonderful americans, a democrat and republican alike are saying that if you do not do something to restore the solvency of the system, $900 billion in negative cash flow right now, you will waddle to the window in the year 2031 and get a check for 25% less, you have got to have rock forebrains not to figure that out. if you are 81, figure this out. when i was 15 years old i put $5 in social security making sweet rolls and i have never eaten another one in my life. i put in when i was in the army. you do not now. i practiced law for 18 years and i never put in $874 per year. no one my age ever did. that went to $2,000.3000 dollars self-employed. when we were messing with this the last time they found out the guy that retired get everything back in the first five years of the benefit. there were 16 people paying into this when i was a fres
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4